Chris

Yep, this old Beacon Hill scope just needs a touch of TLC and a Telrad Just caught a quick look at Jupiter with a 25mm Plossl before the obligatory thick rain clouds rolled in, and I could see four moons and some banding so the optics can't be too terrible.

It probably won't win any beauty contests, plus the mirror might not have the best figure or coatings? but it was at a price to suit somone with almost empty pocket so just couldnt resist. I only took the journey for the Meade Starfinder pedastal mount for my pending low budget obsy. My first scope above 8"! 🙂

Remarkable project, looking forward to seeing the end result.

Loads of videos on YouTube with the P1000, they look a lot of fun. Strangely they're the tool of choice for flat Earthers. They use them to zoom over large lakes or the sea to try and prove the Earth is flat.

A couple of decades back I spent my Uni years quite content with a little Meade ETX90. However, I did get to play with 14 and 16" Meade LX200's whilst studying so it might be cheating to say I was happy just using the ETX! Despite this cheating my in the nutshell thought is that you just make the most of what you've got. I am struggling a bit with this mind as I currently have 3 Plossls and no scopes lol

I feared as much. Lets hope any bidders do their research.

I'm not sure if this would function 'ok' without the other rear elements, but it's an interesting thing to crop up at least. https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/TAL-TELESCOPE-OBJECTIVE/273962429965?hash=item3fc96eee0d:g:k1YAAOSwdORdTtG5

Very easy to read and enjoyable review, thanks for putting it together Michael. The Nikon's sound ace

Helios Lightwing ED's are phenomenal value for money. Wonderfully sharp and contrasty across 90%. I have looked through Leica in the daytime and they are not that much better to justify the price if you ask me. Then again, if you have the money spare and value every % increase in quality, then why not. I'm just saying you could buy the LightWing ED's and have enough left over for a slap up meal in Mrs Miggins pie shop (Black Adder quote, just incase you think I've gone nuts )

When you click on a thread expecting to see an HEQ5 Pro! 😲🤩

Very nice! Great that you've managed to pick up some of the background galaxy. Cooling the camera and longer subs should be very interesting

I really like the slightly vintage styling, I wonder if you can get these in the UK?

That's really handy! The less faffing about the better. I might have to pinch this lighting idea when I get round to building another obs.

I've not dropped by since near the beginning so it's nice to see what amazing progress you've made. I also didn't realise you were building multiple piers, very flash! Like the lighting too.

Very indepth post vlaiv, thanks I can't say I understood it perfectly but I get the point about reclaiming in post processing. I mainly observed with the Edge so for me it's a better choice, especially if you go on to consider non point sources like the Moon. But for the OP I can see that they wouldn't need an Edge SCT, but as many of us agree the aperture is very important. The 100mm frac wouldn't match the 200mm SCT for planetary imaging.

I know what you mean, I agree on the face of it, it shouldn't make any difference on axis. Having owned various non Edge and Edge SCT's I've given this some thought because I can see a difference. My thoughts are as follows. SCT's start producing coma very quickly from the very centre of the field of view. The Edge optics are completely flat (Aplanatic, pretty much zero coma). So if you take the term on axis to mean anywhere roughly in the middle, and not the exact central few mil, then I do see how it could be sharper 'on axis'. Both the white paper and my observations show the Edge to be the sharper SCT, and I'm wondering if this is because I never or rarely observed or imaged with the standard SCT absolutely dead centre on axis? Now I'm not saying RVO's advice is wrong because indeed the C9.25 is seen as the "Jewel in the Crown" of the Standard XLT Celestron SCT's. I believe this is because of it's slightly slower thus better corrected spherical primary mirror. I can see why they would say it wasn't worth paying the large premium for the C9.25 Edge. I don't think the gap between the C8 xlt and the C8 Edge is quite as large so in that case it may be more worth while.

They are blooming sharp for an SCT. I hope you get to look through one at some point. Superb with 100 degree EP's

I think the Edge would have the, well, the Edge. For planetary you need resolution to pull out the detail. Seeing is a secondary consideration as you use fast frame rate imaging and only stack the images from when the seeing is steady. You basically need aperture for resolution, but I heard the benefit tails off after around 12-14" but I'm not sure why that is?

The Celestron White Paper shows spot diagrams for various SCT's and the Edge was the sharpest on axis. This is also my experience having owned a couple.

Beat me to it, John I've owned a couple and the mirrors are good.

I've had a quick look around and can only find an empty bog roll tube and a pint glass. I might have to pass tonight but hopefully someone imaged it so I can check out the oval

I might have to try and MacGyver a rudimentary telescope together so I can take a look I hope you have a good night Stu, it does sound promising

Nice solution. I posted a vid on youtube where I modded this camera and got a reply from someone with the same issue. Your thread helped really helped them out, cheers

Size apart, the price point of these SW ED150's makes it so difficult for QC to be reliable. John's reviews highlight this. It doesn't stop me from really wanting SW to crack the enigma code on this one though

The 130p would have been great but crikey! What views you had with the ED72! Just goes to show, there is no substitute for dark skies! Glad you had fun and cheers for the report